IMO a good way to determine scheduling would be to take a vote of how many user games we want in one season. Furthermore, I think it's a good idea if every conference has at least two users in it. So it'd be like:

ACC:
Maryland
Duke
UNC

Big Ten/Big 12:
TTU
Indiana

Pac 12:
Oregon State
Cal

SEC:
Vandy
Ole Miss

And then the guy who is Air Force can either change to a new school, or join a conference that needs additional members.

That way, everyone is guaranteed to play at least one conference user game (making conferences that much harder to win). From then on, we can add on more user games to our non-conference schedule. All in all, I think everyone should have the same number of user games.

It will be harder to take user skill into account since we don't know where we all stack up in relation to another, but I also think it'd be good to match players up as closely as possible to their skill level._________________^SiLo^

RemixxxxxxxJoined: 06 Mar 2009Posts: 12616Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:44 am Post subject:

Quote:

Actually, your quote "if you don't like it then leave" implies that you want people gone who don't agree with you. Therefore, that means you would kick those out who don't agree with you. Reading comprehension is fun isn't it?

I never implied anywhere I was going to kick anyone. I said you can leave, not I will make you leave.

Quote:

I never crticized your sliders. No one here thinks that you don't work hard on them. But you do have to take into consideration that if you have a bad QB and the accuracy is set low, the bad QB will be even worse. Now a good QB can fight through bad accuracy because his high rating will overshadow the accuracy rating. I don't think that play is very realistic. And I def dont have good players, yet I was ranked #2 in the country for 2 weeks. That has nothing to do with the gameplay. That has everything to do with "My gameplay".

I played with a bad quarterback for three years, I know what it's like. Everyone is going to have a different gameplay[to your "My gameplay" comment], that's the joy of rebuilding teams. I also think everyone needs to realize that the majority of users in this dynasty have played enough NCAA to be skilled with lesser teams, as opposed to when we launched this dynasty.

Quote:

I guess I enjoy the user games more because it takes that "computer" aspect out of the game and forces real strategy. That's why I hope there will be more user games next year with more added users that have come. And maybe their will be some conference realigning to force users to be in the same conferences as well. But passing in this game is already tough with the amped up directional passing EA has added, but without QB directional passing it just makes playing QB torture.

I'm going to add more user games, but from my experience, the more user games in the regular season, the more likely we are to fail. There's also a few things that are simply unfixable in this game - out routes, screen passes, safety play[for the computer], offensive line blocking, defensive tackle pressure, and the holding calls. I've tried for numerous hours to correct certain routes, as well as the penalities that seem to come up often, but haven't been able to find a balance.

Quote:

But again, I'm not trying to b&%#$, but offering a constructive criticism.

The way your post was indicated it was criticism, and not bitching. This is what we're looking for to improve this dynasty.

Quote:

First off I would like to say "Lil Mexico, Lil Mexicohooooo"...but I like the idea Texas Tech guy, if emperor Remix grants my request maybe I can add Indiana, Oregon State and VANDERBILT next season

Comments like this don't help - there's a reason this has been the most successful dynasty on this site, and probably the most successful that everyone has been apart of.

If you'd like to add something constructive then please do so, if you'd like to insult me by calling me "emperor" then you can always PM me.

RemixxxxxxxJoined: 06 Mar 2009Posts: 12616Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 1:45 am Post subject:

VikingsFan51 wrote:

IMO a good way to determine scheduling would be to take a vote of how many user games we want in one season. Furthermore, I think it's a good idea if every conference has at least two users in it. So it'd be like:

ACC:
Maryland
Duke
UNC

Big Ten/Big 12:
TTU
Indiana

Pac 12:
Oregon State
Cal

SEC:
Vandy
Ole Miss

And then the guy who is Air Force can either change to a new school, or join a conference that needs additional members.

That way, everyone is guaranteed to play at least one conference user game (making conferences that much harder to win). From then on, we can add on more user games to our non-conference schedule. All in all, I think everyone should have the same number of user games.

It will be harder to take user skill into account since we don't know where we all stack up in relation to another, but I also think it'd be good to match players up as closely as possible to their skill level.

I have a plan for the conferences going forward - I do want to keep the alignment realistic, though. I'll share what I want to do when the time comes.

IMO a good way to determine scheduling would be to take a vote of how many user games we want in one season. Furthermore, I think it's a good idea if every conference has at least two users in it. So it'd be like:

ACC:
Maryland
Duke
UNC

Big Ten/Big 12:
TTU
Indiana

Pac 12:
Oregon State
Cal

SEC:
Vandy
Ole Miss

And then the guy who is Air Force can either change to a new school, or join a conference that needs additional members.

That way, everyone is guaranteed to play at least one conference user game (making conferences that much harder to win). From then on, we can add on more user games to our non-conference schedule. All in all, I think everyone should have the same number of user games.

It will be harder to take user skill into account since we don't know where we all stack up in relation to another, but I also think it'd be good to match players up as closely as possible to their skill level.

I have a plan for the conferences going forward - I do want to keep the alignment realistic, though. I'll share what I want to do when the time comes.

Cool! I'm sure whatever you have will work just fine. Btw if my stance hasn't been announced I'm fine with whatever sliders. Very few sliders you have tried have been bad and when they were you fixed them immediately. You guys have a right to voice your opinion because remix has been fair, but sometimes you have to realize its remix's OD and if he sees things as fair then they are probably staying. Ill say this to the lower rated teams though, I literally had no more than 4 holding calls a game all year. Has to do with the low overall of your players. It's not like its unreasonable to get 3 holding calls a game IMO. /rant

I'm excited moving forward. This next season will be the last with actual Vandy players (only true Fr that I RSed will be left)._________________

RTA. Remixx: if i could throw in my two cents...I'd like to be in a conference with bck so we could play at least once a year (we've had a 12 year continuous battle on NCAA) Also, how does our offseason work, do we skip any of the stages and just sim them since we have so many users?_________________#1 Pats Fan not living in New England

GG Remixxx. I won 45-10 to secure my second championship. I was able to run the ball at will against Indiana, whose DL got pummelled by my OL. I was able to spring a couple of plays through the air to keep him honest. Defensively, I mixed up my playcalls between coverage plays and blitzes. I don't think he had good enough WRs to get open a whole lot, and tons of his completions were throws into coverage. I was able to pick him off twice, including on his first series of the game to help me get to a 14-0 lead. All in all I played a really good, balanced game and Remixx didn't quite have the team to keep it close. GG.

RemixxxxxxxJoined: 06 Mar 2009Posts: 12616Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:45 pm Post subject:

VikingsFan51 wrote:

GG Remixxx. I won 45-10 to secure my second championship. I was able to run the ball at will against Indiana, whose DL got pummelled by my OL. I was able to spring a couple of plays through the air to keep him honest. Defensively, I mixed up my playcalls between coverage plays and blitzes. I don't think he had good enough WRs to get open a whole lot, and tons of his completions were throws into coverage. I was able to pick him off twice, including on his first series of the game to help me get to a 14-0 lead. All in all I played a really good, balanced game and Remixx didn't quite have the team to keep it close. GG.

On to the offseason!

I got waxed - I couldn't do anything, very disappointed in my team. I missed some chances - a dropped TD, two fumbles were my guys were standing right over top of it, and my QB fumbling at the end.

RemixxxxxxxJoined: 06 Mar 2009Posts: 12616Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:46 pm Post subject:

brady=greatest wrote:

RTA. Remixx: if i could throw in my two cents...I'd like to be in a conference with bck so we could play at least once a year (we've had a 12 year continuous battle on NCAA) Also, how does our offseason work, do we skip any of the stages and just sim them since we have so many users?